Patna High Court
Md. Umar RajaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that in the absence of specific allegations against the petitioner, bail should be granted under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Umar Raja, sought bail in a case (Amarpur P.S. Case No. 557 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that a group of thirteen accused, including the petitioner, had assaulted a victim and fired weapons, but the FIR specifically attributes the firing to a co‑accused, Md. Imran, with no direct allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and that the investigation yielded no evidence of his participation. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, noting a prior case against the petitioner, though he was already on bail in that matter. The court examined whether the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner justified granting bail and, applying Section 438(2) of the CrPC, ordered his release on bail with conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed compliance conditions, including cooperation with the trial and no tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, despite being named in the FIR, is specifically implicated in the alleged offences warranting denial of bail
- Whether the absence of direct allegations against the petitioner under the relevant sections justifies granting bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- BNS — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- false implication
- Arms Act
- investigation
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28841 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-557 Year-2025 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
Md. Umar Raja S/o Md. Guljar R/o Village - Dauna, P.S. - Amarpur, District.
- Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Anand
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 557 of 2025 for the
offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS
and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on
19.08.2025 at about 1:00 AM, the informant Md. Abbas,
resident of Village Dauna, P.S. Sabour, District Bhagalpur, his
son Md. Sarique was returning home after work. Near the road
side he parked his car and sleeping. In the driver sit his driver
Miraj was seated, meanwhile 13 named accused person came
and specific allegation against Md. Imran who sought dead to
Md. Sariq. It is further alleged that on the sound of firing the
father of the deceased came outside and victim Md. Sariq
brought to the Hospital for treatment, but his condition was
critical. It is further alleged that in serious condition his son has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28841 of 2026(3) dt.09-07-2026
2/4
disclosed that 13 named person including this petitioner armed
with various weapons and assaulted the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is
next submitted that from perusal of the FIR it appears that
although the petitioner is named in the FIR but there is no
specific allegation of assault or firing is attributed against the
petitioner rather the allegation of firing is attributed against one
co-accused person, namely, Md. Imran and at best the petitioner
may be a member of the mob. It is next submitted that nothing
has come during the course of investigation which suggests that
petitioner was involved in the present crime in question.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR and petitioner
has antecedent of one case other than the present case but fairly
submits that petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that there is no specific allegation against the
petitioner rather the specific allegation of firing is attributed
against the co-accused person, namely, Md. Imran, let the
petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28841 of 2026(3) dt.09-07-2026
3/4
before the court below within a period of thirty days from the
date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M.,
Banka in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 557 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following
conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28841 of 2026(3) dt.09-07-2026
4/4
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.